Having fun with it

It turns out that 28mm is a focal length that I love using!  I was worried that the shorter focal length would be unflattering for portraits and that I'd need to be so close that I influenced the picture.  Turns out that I was close enough to influence before I had the 28mm, and when I'm a little ways back and not directing the photo it allows for some interesting environment to creep into the frame.  For shots of kids, the little bit of distortion doesn't really harm anything - but I'll stick to something like a 50mm or 85mm if I'm doing formal shots...

I took it on a hike the other day and aside from putting on a zoom to get a few shots at 200mm I never really wanted anything else.  Sure having fun with it :)  The f/2 aperture really made a difference too - nice and bright to look through and in the woods I'm still getting 1/60s or 1/100s where my zoom would dump me down to 1/15 or 1/30s.

85mm f/1.8 Canon prime lens

After sort of moving to zoom lenses for most of my work, and only the 60mm macro as a prime, I rented the 85mm f/1.2 recently. While this lens is very much beyond any kind of reasonable price that I could ever justify, it got me interested in both primes, and the focal length again. I liked the ability to be a bit further away and get less in focus compared to my 60mm.

As well, when comparing the 135mm f/2 and the 85mm f/1.8 the depth of field difference was there, but not something I thought I would notice a lot if framed right. As well, when I rented the 135mm I found it nice, but a bit long for most use on a crop sensor camera. At the same time, I became convinced I would appreciate the 35mm f/1.4 L lens as well, but couldn't justify it, either. As mentioned previously, I ended up deciding on the GF1 instead of the prime lens - and I've been happy with that decision.

Then I found a refurbished 85mm f/1.8 and decided to give it a go. Since the alternative at 85mm in the Canon lineup is so outrageous, and even the 'cheap' 135mm is three times the price, I'm happy to have found a decent prime lens that should get some use. Here is a recent stock image taken with this lens. I like the out of focus background, and even her ears are showing some blurring at f/2...



One thing I haven't quite understood with primes is that they often seem to have poor results in tests wide open. One wonders why you would pay for such a lens over a zoom if you "can't" even shoot wide open with it. And there is the problem - the reviewers often ask the wrong question. They are asking how well does it perform taking shots of a black and white, high contrast target in bright light - what they get is a bunch of CA and fringing, and general lack of contrast. If you actually take such a lens and shoot in the kinds of conditions where you want a fast lens, you find that it performs admirably. Hence why there are so many reviews that primes aren't great, not sharp wide open, and then a whole bunch of people using it for professional use and swearing by it. You need to actually use it to rate it! How often will I shoot back lit leaves with this lens wide open? Never! How many wedding shots are blurry, slightly soft, but absolutely loved because they captured the emotion?